Romney under pressure to score debate win against Obama - Reuters [ournewsa.blogspot.com]
Brad Paisley - This Is Country Music (CMA Awards '10)Music video by Brad Paisley performing This Is Country Music (CMA Awards '10). (C) 2010 Country Music Association
1 of 21. Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney poses for a photograph with workers at a Chipotle Restaurant in Denver, Colorado October 2, 2012 ahead of his first debate with U.S. President Barack Obama.
Credit: Reuters/Brian Snyder
DENVER |
DENVER (Reuters) - Republican candidate Mitt Romney is under pressure to produce a strong performance on Wednesday at his first face-to-face debate with President Barack Obama to try to turn around a race for the White House that has been edging away from him.
The 90-minute encounter offers the chance to reach more than 60 million people on television, a far greater audience than watched either candidate speak at the Democratic and Republican conventions.
While that has potential dividends in attracting undecided voters, there is also the risk that one or the other will make a major mistake that can overshadow the campaign in the last five weeks before the November 6 election.
Running behind in the polls, Romney is more in need of a victory than Obama at the University of Denver debate, the first of three such face-offs scheduled in the next four weeks.
"I think he's got to have a pretty convincing win," said David Yepsen, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University. "He's had a bad few weeks and he needs to change the narrative of the campaign."
The Republican was damaged by a secretly taped video from a private fundraiser in which he said 47 percent of voters are dependent on government and unlikely to support him. It was only one of several recent stumbles by the former Massachusetts governor in his second presidential bid.
At the Denver debate, Romney needs not only to repair some of the damage from the video. He must raise questions about Obama's handling of the U.S. economy and explain how his own plan would create more jobs and cut the budget deficit.
Romney must get through the debate without losing his cool and without appearing to be disrespectful to Obama, who many Americans like personally despite his struggle to create jobs. And the often robotic Republican could do with showing some personality to make voters feel more comfortable with him.
"Americans who are thinking about voting for Romney need to hear from him about how he would change the country for the better," said Republican strategist Ron Bonjean. "They're leaning toward the devil they know, which is President Obama. Romney has to knock it out of the park by showing the contrast between himself and Obama."
ECONOMIC CHALLENGES FOR OBAMA
The Democrat has the challenge of answering why Americans should consider themselves better off now than they were four years ago, a key measure in every presidential election. He needs to explain what he would do to rekindle job creation in a second term.
The U.S. jobless rate has been above 8 percent for 43 straight months and is the top priority of voters. The Obama camp argues he inherited a tough economy from Republican predecessor George W. Bush. Many voters seem willing to cede him that point but nonetheless are looking for a clear way out of the economic doldrums.
"He's got to reassure people who like him that it's OK to vote for him again," said Yepsen. "I think Americans like the man; they're a little bit concerned about the job he's done. And he's got to bring them back home."
Obama is considered far more likable than Romney and leads him on many attributes in opinion polls. He has the edge over Romney in many battleground states such as Ohio where the election will be decided.
So far, Obama has offered little in the way of a second-term governing agenda beyond more of the same policies, amid rising debt, budget deficits and increasingly expensive entitlement programs. His first term has been marked by fierce partisan battles that have frozen Washington into political gridlock.
Obama's campaign has cast Romney as a wealthy elitist who is out of touch with the plight of everyday Americans.
Body language will be closely watched to see if Obama can fight a tendency to be condescending and professorial and whether Romney can resist arguing about the debate rules or who gets the most time to speak, as he did during Republican primary debates.
Both men found some late news that could help them make their cases at the debate, which will be moderated by Jim Lehrer of PBS and starts at 9 p.m. Eastern time (0100 GMT).
The Obama camp seized on a New York Times article that said Romney had benefited financially on his offshore holdings. The Obama campaign charged that Romney had "failed to come clean with the American people."
A comment from Vice President Joe Biden gave the Romney campaign an opportunity. Biden accused Romney of seeking to raise taxes on America's middle class, which he said "has been buried the last four years."
"Of course the middle class has been buried," said Romney's vice presidential running mate, Paul Ryan. "They're being buried by regulations; they're being buried by taxes; they're being buried by borrowing. They're being buried by the Obama administration's economic failures."
Experts are not necessarily in agreement on whether debates can serve as a turning point in a presidential election.
But history shows there are plenty of cases where they have cast some candidates in a negative light, from Al Gore's heavy sighs and eye-rolling during a 2000 debate with George W. Bush to Richard Nixon's profuse sweating during his encounters with John F. Kennedy in 1960.
(Editing by Alistair Bell and Eric Walsh)
- Link this
- Share this
- Digg this
- Reprints
Suggest Romney under pressure to score debate win against Obama - Reuters Issues Question by susie_ame: Suppose Isreal was attacked and the "country" ceased to exist. What will happen to all the Jews? "country"- Arab nations do not consider Israel a country, or that it has a right to exist, the UN does. what right does Israel have to that land? Best answer for Suppose Isreal was attacked and the "country" ceased to exist. What will happen to all the Jews?:
Answer by Leverage
I feel the same way about "arab" "countries".
Answer by Horiah C
well..it wud happen they way it always happened many of them always lived outside Israel
Answer by Mira Bell
They would be annihilated. The lucky ones would be expelled or - gulp - forced to live under Islamic law with no freedom of religion, like they do in Iran. My evidence ? I've listened to Hamas. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1178020746583&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull Sheik Ahmad Bahr, acting Speaker of the Palestinian Legislative Council, declared during a Friday sermon at a Sudan mosque that America and Israel will be annihilated and called upon Allah to kill Jews and Americans "to the very Last One." Following are excerpts from the sermon that took place last month, courtesy of MEMRI.
Answer by PaperbackWriter
Well, every single person in Israel would be dead - because the Arab and Islamic nations that have vowed to destroy Israel also openly state they would not spare anyone. So that would leave those of us who live in the diaspora, outside Israel. It would mean that yet again, we would always be at the mercy of whichever leader was in power at any given time. Jews can never again be a minority in every single nation. History has shown us, over and over, what happens to us when we don't have a tiny corner of the world in which we alone determine our own security and fate. If Israel loses ONCE, she ceases to exist. That's why 18 year old Israeli men and women have to join the army. EDIT TO BIG T I'm not 'justifying' anything. I'm explaining the simple fact that if Israel is defeated once in war initiated by her Arab and Islamic enemies, she ceases to exist. What part of that statement did you fail to understand? I've lived in Israel, she is tiny. There are terror alerts all the time, and sadly many terrorists don't get stopped and the event is more than just an 'alert'. http://theisraeliwaronterror.blogspot.com
Answer by Big T
Well, since Moses was born brought up in and lived there for a while, perhaps they could justifiably claim, and be given, a huge chunk of Egypt as their new "homeland". I'm curious as to your justification, PaperbackWriter. Why then does Switzerland, who, so far as I know, hasn't recently attacked a single soul with Apache helicopters, tanks, ships, rockets, phosphorous shells, fleschettes etc., etc., have conscription? edit: Thankyou PaperbackWriter, so why does Switzerland have conscription, without finding the need to slaughter its neighbours? But I do understand, and sympathise with an Israeli view that has felt it needed to slaughter (sorry, overkill) in order to make its point that it was cheesed off with being subjected to rocket attack, even if the rockets have actually killed only a tiny number of people (ANY number is too many). I also understand the Palestinian view that Israel is trying to take over all Palestinian lands, and that they consider such take overs as invasion, and so are just responding to hostile action by Israel. Allowing for that view, would you not agree that your statemenst that hostilities, "initiated by Arab and Islamic enemies", might be perceived by both them, and many others, as mistaken? If my neighbour annexes large parts of my garden for his own use, and refuses to withdraw behind his boundary, who is the troublemaker? Me? I think not. Anyway, the first part of my answer still applies. Surely they still retain a claim of sorts on a large slice of Egypt? edit: Further.. There are a huge number of refugees in Sudan, Congo, Rwanda and various other places in Africa. Let us take what I admit is an extremely unlikely propositiion, that the UN decides that those refugees can be given a "homeland" in Israel. 1. Do you suppose, for more than one split second, that Israel would allow that to happen? Thought not. 2. Do you suppose that if, in spite of Israel's best efforts, such a "homeland" were established within defined boundaries within Israel, that Israelis would allow expansion beyond those boundaries? Thought not.
Answer by VirtueOfIntolerance
that wouldn't happen... period. If Israel was attacked, the attacking countries will most likely cease to exist. The israeli military is not stupid and they're definitelly not as gullible as americans.
Answer by stitch39
It'll never happen. Israel knows it can only lose once and its over. Thats why they fight as fiercely as they do. Israel doesn't want to overthrow any country, unlike some Arab nations.
Answer by cbjack
Every country of the world was conquered at one time or another. What a mess is the Angles and the Saxons had to leave England, if the Normans had to leave Scotland, if the Americans had to leave America, if.... Well you get the idea.
Ashton Shepherd - Where Country GrowsDownload Ashton's new album 'Where Country Grows' on iTunes now! bit.ly
0 comments:
Post a Comment